Symposium on unidentified flying objects: hearings before the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninetieth Congress, second session, July 29, 1968.

69
Discussion.—I
am
still
in
the
process
of
trying
to locate
Kratovil
to
confirm
sighting
details;
but
the
fact
that
four
newspaper
accounts for that
day
give
the
same
information
about
the
major
points
probably
justifies
acceptance
of
those
points.
From
upper-wind
data
for that
area
and
time,
I
have
confirmed
the
presence
of
fairly
strong flow
from
the
WSW
aloft,
whence
Kratovil's
press
comment,
"If
this
was
a
weather
balloon,
it's
the
first
time
I
ever
saw
one
traveling
against
the
wind,"
seems
reasonable.
The
cruising
speed
of
a
Constella-
tion
is
around 300
mph,
so during
the
reported
10
minutes'
duration
of the
crew's
sighting,
they
moved
about
50
miles
relative
to
the
air,
so
it
would have
been
impossible
for
them
to
have
kept
a
weather
balloon in
sight
for
this
long.
Furthermore,
it
was
about
1.5
hours
after
scheduled
balloon
-release
time,
so
that
even
a
small
balloon
would have
either
burst
or passed
to
altitudes
too
high
to
be
visible.
Finally,
with
flow
out
of the
southwest
sector
from
surface to
above
20,000
ft.,
any
balloon
from
Grenier
AFB
would have
been
carried
along
a
trajectory
nowhere
near
where
the
TWA
crew
spotted
the
"large,
white
-colored,
disc
-like
object"
overhead.
5.
In
my
files
are
many
other "balloon"
cases
from
the past
twenty
years,
cases
that
ought
never
have
been
so
labelled,
had
the
evaluators
kept
relevant
quan-
titative
points
in
mind.
To
ignore
most
of the
salient
features
of
a
sighting
in
order
to
advance
an
easy
"balloon" explanation
is
only
one
more
of
many
different
ways
in
which
some
very
puzzling
UFO
observations
have
been
shoved out
of
sight.
WHY
AREN'T
UFO'S
EVER
TRACKED
BY
RADAR?
The
skeptic
who
asks
this
question,
and
many
do,
is
asking
a
very
reasonable
question.
With
so
much
radar equipment
deployed
all
over the world,
and
especially
within
the
United
States,
it
seems
sensible
to
expect
that,
if
there
are
any
airborne
devices
maneuvering
in
our
airspace,
they
ought
to
show
up
on
radars once
in
a
while.
They
do
indeed,
and
have
been doing so for
all
of
the
two
decades
that
radar
has
been
in
widespread
use.
Here,
as
with so
many
other
general misconceptions
about
the
true
state
of the
UFO
problem,
we
encounter
disturbingly
large
amounts
of
misinformation.
As
with
other
categories
of
UFO
misinformation, the only
adequate
corrective is detailed discussion
of
large
numbers
of
individual
cases.
Only
space
limitations
preclude
discussion
of dozens
of
striking
radar
-tracking incidents involving
UFOs,
both here
and
abroad;
they
do
exist.
1.
Case
85.
Fukuoka,
Japan,
October
15,1948.
A
very
early
radar
-UFO
case,
still
held
as
an
official
Unidentified,
involved
an
attempted
interception
of the
unknown
object
by an F-61
flying
near
Fukuoka,
Japan,
at
about 11:00
p.m.
local
time
on
10/15/48.
The
official
file
on
this
incident
is
lengthy
(Ref.
42)
;
only the
highlights
can
be
recounted
here.
The
F-61
(with
pilot
and
radar
operator)
made
six
attempts
to
close
with the
unknown, from
which
a
radar
return
was
repeatedly obtained
with the
airborne radar.
Each
time
the
radarman
would
get
a
contact
and
the
F-61
pilot
tried
to
close,
the
unknown
would
accelerate
and
pass
out
of range.
Although
the
radar
return
seemedcomparable
to that of
a
conventional
aircraft,
"the radar
observer estimated that
on
three
of the
sightings,
the
object traveled
seven
miles in approximately
twenty
seconds, giving
a
speed of approximately
1200
mph."In
another
passage, the
official
case
-file
remarks
that
"when
the
P-61
approached
within
12,000
feet,
the
target
executed
a
180
0 turn
and
dived
under
the
F-61,"
adding that
"the
F-61
attempted
to
dive
with the
target
but
was
unable
to
keep
pace."
The
report
mentions that the
unknown
"could
go
almost
straight
up
or
down
out of radar
elevation
limits,"
and
asserts
further that"this aircraft
seemed
to
be cognizant of the
whereabouts of the
F-61
at
all
times
. .
."
The F-61
airmen,
1st Lt. Oliver
Hemphill
(pilot)
and 2d
Lt.
Barton Halter
(radarman)
are
described in the report
as
being
"of
excellent character
and
intelligence
and
are trained observers."
Hemphill, drawing on
his
combat
experience in the European
theater, said
that
"the only aircraft
I
can compare our
targets to is
the
German
ME
-163."